Woman in US loses custody of her child because she is a smoker...

[Piffle]

BBeggars belief! A woman has lost custody of her six-year-old son - because she was a smoker.

The case is thought to be the first of its kind in the US.

Former nurse Tammy Pierce was described as a "warm and loving" mother in court.

But a judge said her son, Joel Jnr, should live with his father Joel after the pair split because she smoked.

Tammy, 32, who has since quit her 20-a-day habit, now only see her son during school holidays.

She lives in Florida and her former husband is more than 1,000 miles away.

Tammy appealed against the decision but the verdict was upheld.

The boy's father, the court heard, complained that his son's clothes smelt of tobacco after visits.

And he feared smoke may have caused some of the boy's illnesses, such as ear infections.

Tammy is now planning a new appeal to regain custody.

She said: "I am a good, caring, loving mother and my heart has been broken. I never once smoked in front of Joel, or even in the house

Why do they live 1000 miles apart anyway?

My mother smoked and yes it made me and my brother ill no doubt, ear infections, asthma.
However had we been sent to live with our dad when they split.
We would have starved, been filthy and neglected
I do not for one minute think on all cases children are better off with a mother than a father, certainly ds's father (ds is 12) could take care of him equally as well as me.
i it right though that in the US that you can sue your parents if they smoked around you and you got ill?

i it right though that in the US that you can sue your parents if they smoked around you and you got ill?

I don't know for sure. You can sue for just about anything there same as here. That doesn't mean your case won't be summarily dismissed or that your suit will be in any way successful.

Personally, I think there are far more problems w/British family courts - including their continually being able to operate behind a wall of secrecy AND blatant sex discrimination - that are far more pressing matters.

US family courts are NOT permitted to do this - it's illegal. They have to disclose and can be sued for sexual discrimination.

So if any citizen or journalist wants to find out what the facts really are behind hte case, they're welcome to do so b/c it's public record in a matter of time - varies by state, usually 60 days.

I totally agree that CAFCASS and the agencies around child custody in this country are screwed.
I know some truly fabulous fathers who have been shafted by the courts here.

Smoking bans are common there. Again it varies by state and city, California having some of the strictest laws in place.

In the past, states have sued tobacco companies.

Why? B/c each state is allocated monies by the federal government for Medicare, the state-funded healthcare plan for over 65s.

But states w/greater percentages of over 65 smokers, Florida, for example, were racking up HUGE medical costs to deal w/sick smokers.

And tobacco companies hid that fact that smoking made people sick for a long while.

So the states sued them to cover the excess cost of the healthcare.

Sounds dramatic if it was only the smoking that was the issue. Anyway everything else being equal, and assuming that the boy's wishes were considered, it doesn't seem that terrible.